TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 757
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1. The order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is against law and facts. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in disallowing the expenditure of Rs. 1,14,336/- in respect of bad debts written off during the year. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in disallowing the expenditure on the bad debts actually written off during the year. Your appellant prays that the addition of Rs. 1,14,336/- be deleted. Yours appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend or delete any of the ground of appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant to AY 2007-08 from the books of account of the assessee it was found that there was opening balance of Rs. 1,63,819/-, during the year as against the due balance of Rs. 1,63,819/-, Rs. 63,788/- was paid by Bil Metal on 22/04/2006. During the year goods worth Rs. 1,02,592/- was sold by the assessee and further payment of Rs. 40,000/- was received by the assessee on 24/03/2007. He submitted that the AO observed that the assessee continued its business transactions with Bil Metal Industries Ltd. He further submitted that the AR on behalf of the assessee agreed to the proposed addition of bad debt of Rs. 1,14,336/-. The ld.Sr.DR submitted that under the facts of the present case, the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sold by the assessee and further payment of Rs. 40,000/- was received by the assessee on 24.03.2007. 4.1. From the above stated facts, it is very clear that the business transactions of the assessee were continued during the F.Y.2006-07 with Bil Metal Industries Ltd. Bil Metal ind. Ltd. was found purchaser from the assessee and towards purchases payments were also made. Thus lit was running account. Considering these facts, assessee's claim for bad debt of Rs,1,14,366/- is found premature. Vide order sheet entry dated 16.11.2009, these facts also brought to the notice of the A.R. of the assessee & disallowances on account of claim of bad debts of Rs. 1,14,366/- was proposed for which A.R. of the assessee was agreed. Therefore,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es not amount to bad debt rather it is a trading loss. A similar inference can be drawn from the finding of honorable Calcutta High Court in case of CIT V Coates of India Ltd (1998) 232 ITR 324 (Cal). Therefore, claim of the appellant for allowing deduction of amount of Rs. 114366/- as a bad debt is not sustainable. Now it has to be seen whether the same can be allowed as a trading loss. It is seen from the assessment order that the appellant has not furnished any evidence to show that which are the bills in respect of whom payment is being received from Bil Metal Ind Ltd and which are the bills under dispute. Appellant has also not furnished any evidence/ detail showing the nature of dispute and extent of amount under dispute. It is also n....